Where does FPM stand on the political spectrum?

[dodzi]

Originally Posted by Hierombalos

not really, if you take the example of the LF in the 80's, on paper the programs it implemented in the areas it controlled (auxilia coop blabla) would tend to classify it as leftist economically, yet its religious conservatism and sectarian speech puts it on te right spectrum.

Doing charity doesn't make you a leftist... Both sides do charity to win votes. The difference here is that rightist parties (such as LF, FM, feudal lords, conservatives in general) believe that charity should be done by private institutions, based on the principle that private donors can chose the recipients...

While leftist parties (socialists for instance) believe that the State should handle charity and all sorts of social programs, so that it could do so on the principle of equality and non-discrimination...

for FPM i believe its exactly the opposite, liberal economically with a minimum of state involvement to protect the lower strata, it's a bit like modern european capitalism, you know brute capitalism with a pinch of keynes added. so that's on the right, but on the other hand, the secular values, and the inclination to break taboos, in terms of feudalism, sectarianism, family blabla, puts it squarely in the left.

100% disagree!!!

FPM is far from a capitalist party! It has been criticizing Hariri's capitalist economic policies for as long as I can remember!

Besides, FPM had in its 2005 program a chapter that included social programs! Its program does believe in the liberal economic model, but an embedded one, as you say, a Keynesian one (which has nothing to do with "brute capitalism", since Keynes believed that unchecked capitalism will lead to social, economical and financial breakdown, and he was the one who suggested state involvement in the economy, in a period of history that didn't!), including social programs for the poor and the protection of the rights of the lower classes!

in lebanon politics has not yet reached its full maturity, political discourse still range at the point of definition, there is still no consensus on what constitutes lebanon, its place in the world, etc.... thus the traditional view of left and right will nto apply yet, although many parties have taken clear positions other haven't.

there are left parties like the LCP, and right parties like FM, but at the same time there are parties like Hezbollah, LF, FPM, etc... who cannot be classified. there are also other parties like PSP which are really an institutionalized and advanced form of feudalism, cloaked in a habit of progressiveness.

While I agree with you on the first part, I disagree partially on the second... LCP is left, FM is right, but LF is clearly extreme-right (its history and program speak for themselves: Christian party created for the purpose of security and the protection of a certain sect through violent means; it preaches federalism, division, Christian powers and Christian superiority; it believes that Maronites aren't Arabs but Phoenicians, etc.).

Feudal parties are considered conservative, and hence rightist!

[Positive Balance]

Talk of political spectrum is misplaced in Lebanon. Neither the parties nor the electorate care to have a declared ideological position on anything. Expediency is the key. Ideological positions are only possible on the fringes (e.g. LCP) and non-political party movements.

All parties are for lower taxes, higher fuel subsidies, lower fuel taxes, less debt, more spending, less inflation, higher minimum wage... and the list goes on.

[elias-aj]

Originally Posted by dodzi

Left/Right in Lebanon should be taken from a strictly Lebanese point of view. Just like the Democratic Party is considered Left in the US, and the Modem center-right in France, each of these classification is done according to the country we're in...

OK but there is no Left / Right in Lebanon. You had anti-syrians and pro-syrians, then you had 14Th March and 8Th March, then you had quadripartite alliance and FPM (basically) etc.

Originally Posted by dodzi

As for the 5 points:
1- I agree that focus on -internal- security is a rightist objective. However, justice and defense aren't... Justice is usually a focus for opposition parties anywhere in the world (all oppositions world wide will accuse their respective governments and parliamentary majority of injustice). Security is a focus for rightist parties in most countries, but not all...

I was saying that FPM position is that the state should focus on its primary tasks, which is rather a rightist demand. However, justice and security issues are used by every single political party.

Originally Posted by dodzi

2- Would you say strict sovereignty isn't a concern for Castro's Cuba, Lenin's Russia, Mitterrand's France, Ceausescu's Romania, Zapatero's Spain, Tito's Yugoslavia?

Strict sovereignity principle is not really a "leftist" idea as socialism and communism are expansive. Those ideologies are based on internationalism. Now between the theory and... it's another story.

Originally Posted by dodzi

3- Strict independence between the powers is also an international opposition's focus... No relation with right/left ideology

It has a relation. The strict independence between the powers is the base of individual freedom. Socialism and communism support a concentration of power.

Originally Posted by dodzi

4- You are right on this one... But again, all, or almost all Lebanese parties are rightist in that case. Hence one should focus on how each party sees the current situation, and wishes the future to be... I'd say yes, FPM is economically liberal. But it also wishes the State to take more control of socio-economic issues, the social policies in general... Bigger involvement of the State in socio-economic affairs is a strict leftist ideology!

I don't know to which extent FPM supports the involvement of the State in socio-economic affairs. It's an issue related to our feudal / services form of society. But we need hours to discuss about it...

Originally Posted by dodzi

5- If by "rationalization", you mean good governance (less corruption, less waste, tighter budget for expenses, etc.), then again, you may be right, but it is relative nonetheless... While a stricter control of corruption is a rightist political focus, they are also a focus by all opposition parties in the world! As for "less public expenses", I believe that FPM isn't for "less expenses", but "better expenses"... In fact, they might even believe in more expenses on socio-economic issues... But that's debatable...

It's indeed relative but leftist parties tend to rely a lot on bureaucratie, which is to be opposed to a rationalization of our political institutions (and administration by the way).

Originally Posted by dodzi

In 1995, Hariri lowered all taxes to a flat 10% tax rate. That's a pure liberal (by the historical definition, not the American one) policy... FPM, as far as I'm concerned, has always defended the rights of the poor, and believes in more social expenses on them... FPM is hence on the left from FM... But since it believes in a liberal economic policy, it still is rightist! In my opinion, when it comes to economic issues, FPM stands in a center-right position...

In fact, the Hariri's successive governments never applied the real liberal economic rules, apart from some decisions (like the one you cited). I'll take the example of Solidere and the fact that they applied a policy of state intervention (debt policy). I think in fact that we're far more liberals than they really are.

[dodzi]

Great input!

Originally Posted by elias-aj

OK but there is no Left / Right in Lebanon. You had anti-syrians and pro-syrians, then you had 14Th March and 8Th March, then you had quadripartite alliance and FPM (basically) etc.

Well, anti- and pro-Syrian perspectives aren't really left/right ideologies as you say...

However, when it came to the civil war and before the civil war, you had a right-wing sectarian conservative camp, and a leftist reformist and progressive-secular camp...

Would you disagree on the left/right labeling there?

Again, later in your post, you talk about ideological differences when it came to the economy (liberal vs state intervention), the military, social issues (state intervention or not), public administration, and the separation of powers...

In my opinion, while left/right ideologies are not as rigid in Lebanon as they are in Europe and the West, I still believe they are accurate... It will always be a bit difficult to perceive, sometimes even in Europe, but they are still accurate... Don't you think?

I was saying that FPM position is that the state should focus on its primary tasks, which is rather a rightist demand. However, justice and security issues are used by every single political party.

I agree... A strict Liberal ideology believes that the State should focus mainly (if not only) on security, justice, defense and infrastructure...

But that doesn't mean that leftist ideology keeps security and defense on the sidelines.

In fact, while FPM does have a security and defense program, it also criticizes the use of too much power on defense and security issues... I believe FPM's main focus is justice, before security!

Strict sovereignity principle is not really a "leftist" idea as socialism and communism are expansive. Those ideologies are based on internationalism. Now between the theory and... it's another story.

You are right! Leftist ideology is more "internationalist"... But that's only when it comes to socialist, communist or even Arabist ideologies... I consider myself center-left, doesn't make me a socialist...

Now I'll give you a counter-argument: historically, what you say makes sense when you look at the rise of communism, socialism and the cold war in general.

However, it is not a general rule and I'll give you many examples that even contradict that rule:
- the EU construction is a rightist idea, and has evolved in a rightist perspective (freedom of movement, free-trade, etc.), while leftist in Europe are more anti-Europe and believe in protectionism... But here again it may change from a country to another

- a very long time ago (18th-19th century), conservatives used to be those who believed in the conservative order of things: the Ottoman Empire, the European balance of power, while what was then considered leftist were against foreign intervention in the affairs of their respective countries...

It has a relation. The strict independence between the powers is the base of individual freedom. Socialism and communism support a concentration of power.

Hmmm I don't agree... You are comparing the Liberals to the Communists... Extreme-Left and Extreme-Right both believe in the concentration of powers... They're both authoritarian... But contemporary right and left (not extreme) both agree on the idea of power separation...

I don't know to which extent FPM supports the involvement of the State in socio-economic affairs. It's an issue related to our feudal / services form of society. But we need hours to discuss about it...

Well FPM is against feudal and khadamet systems... It is a conservative and anti-State system... FPM wants such services to be done by the State, not by private institutions. In this regard, it makes FPM a leftist party...

It's indeed relative but leftist parties tend to rely a lot on bureaucratie, which is to be opposed to a rationalization of our political institutions (and administration by the way).

I wouldn't say leftists believe in bureaucratie... The fact that leftists believe in more government makes it also more liable for the State's malfunctions... Bureaucraty is the consequence of more State involvement. Management 101: the more an organisation is big, the more bureaucratic it is...

In fact, the Hariri's successive governments never applied the real liberal economic rules, apart from some decisions (like the one you cited). I'll take the example of Solidere and the fact that they applied a policy of state intervention (debt policy). I think in fact that we're far more liberals than they really are.

You are 100% correct!

But Hariri's Solidere is kind of ambiguous: it first nationalized propreties before privatizing them...

But you are right: FPM is liberal because it wants to liberalize the market!

[Ali_81]

can someone please explain to me what is the difference between central left and social democrat? for me it is the same thing :s

Anyway i dont see FPM as a liberal party, neither a conservative party. Hala2 it is a fact that most FPM followers are christians who are on average more liberal than muslims.

I see FPM as a center right party, usualy i prefer socialist policies, but socialism cannot be adopted in a weak country like lebanon, our economy is weak and cannot afford social reforms now, and our system is infected by corruption and by corrupt politicians.
Leftists are weak and they cannot survive in a corrupt system, nor they can fight corruptions, thats why we need a strong party like FPM to do the job now.

[dodzi]

Originally Posted by Ali_81

can someone please explain to me what is the difference between central left and social democrat? for me it is the same thing :s

Anyway i dont see FPM as a liberal party, neither a conservative party. Hala2 it is a fact that most FPM followers are christians who are on average more liberal than muslims.

I see FPM as a center right party, usualy i prefer socialist policies, but socialism cannot be adopted in a weak country like lebanon, our economy is weak and cannot afford social reforms now, and our system is infected by corruption and by corrupt politicians.
Leftists are weak and they cannot survive in a corrupt system, nor they can fight corruptions, thats why we need a strong party like FPM to do the job now.

It can be considered the same, but it is relative to the country you're in...

In Belgium, the Christian-Democrats are considered center. But the Flemish ones are considered center-right, while the francophones are considered center-left. In France, the MoDem are considered Center-Right, in the UK they're Right (more right than the liberals), but they're also not really social-democrats but conservatives...

It's just different denominations... That's why I asked the mods to allow multiple voting possibilities.

Usually you can label on different scales:
- left/right
- conservative/progressive
- liberal/social-democrats/socialist
- ...

[dodzi]

Right (2) 5.88%
Center-Right (6 17.65%
Center (3) 8.82%
Center-Left (7) 20.59%

Liberal (2) 5.88%
Social-Democrat (3) 8.82%

If we consider Liberal being right/center-right, and social-democrat being center/center-left, we might have these aggregate results:

Right/Center-Right (10) votes 29.41%
Center/Center-Left (13) votes 38.23%

Now on the Right side, there are more votes for Center-Right than for Right, while on the Left side you have more Center-Left votes than Center votes (even if we consider social-democrat as Center). I voted Center although I would have rather voted Center-Left...

I would hence say that those who took the poll more likely see FPM as a Center-Center-Left (so somewhere between Center and Center-Left, while closer to the center). It would be interesting if we kept that poll alive so that we could see what FPMers in general see FPM as...

[Souss]

Originally Posted by dodzi

Right (2) 5.88%
Center-Right (6 17.65%
Center (3) 8.82%
Center-Left (7) 20.59%

Liberal (2) 5.88%
Social-Democrat (3) 8.82%

If we consider Liberal being right/center-right, and social-democrat being center/center-left, we might have these aggregate results:

Right/Center-Right (10) votes 29.41%
Center/Center-Left (13) votes 38.23%

Now on the Right side, there are more votes for Center-Right than for Right, while on the Left side you have more Center-Left votes than Center votes (even if we consider social-democrat as Center). I voted Center although I would have rather voted Center-Left...

I would hence say that those who took the poll more likely see FPM as a Center-Center-Left (so somewhere between Center and Center-Left, while closer to the center). It would be interesting if we kept that poll alive so that we could see what FPMers in general see FPM as...

The only conclusion you can draw is that the people are seriously confused , understandably so, partly because the poll is poorly presented (there is some overlap between choices), but more importantly because the whole question is beside the point.

FPM stands in the political spectrum wherever Michel Aoun stands. It is not a functional political party where policy is formulated according to processes that are democratic. So is there any value in asking whether an autocratic party is left or right or centre? Maybe if you don't really care about it and are curioius about the leanings of the leader.

But what really matters is that neither you or I or anyone has a say in it.

[Dark Angel]

Originally Posted by Souss

The only conclusion you can draw is that the people are seriously confused , understandably so, partly because the poll is poorly presented (there is some overlap between choices), but more importantly because the whole question is beside the point.

FPM stands in the political spectrum wherever Michel Aoun stands. It is not a functional political party where policy is formulated according to processes that are democratic. So is there any value in asking whether an autocratic party is left or right or centre? Maybe if you don't really care about it and are curioius about the leanings of the leader.

But what really matters is that neither you or I or anyone has a say in it.

I believe you are right on this one. This is more of a classification on where GMA himself falls on the spectrum, however even though at the moment the party is a reflection of GMA’s position and opinions, there are some declared objectives that can provide a sort of a political compass.

What troubles me however is the perception of FPMers themselves, they seem to be concentrated in two blocks, center right and center left, which means that at the moment they are bound by something closer to a cause that falls under political reform, change, and the need to turn the page on the rule of the warlords and their bloody history; a perspective that opens the door much wider to all kinds of possibilities in the future, including some sort of a schism between the center right and the center left, something which surfaces from time to time in the midst of FPMers and on the forum itself, giving rise to conflicting ideological views that are then brushed aside for higher priority matters that are common to both sides.

Ironically, this means that FPM’s success in achieving the reforms it is seeking could also spell the beginning of its end, because it will remove the common cause binding its center right and center left wings and leaves the door wide open for a split in a normal happy state.

that said, I have serious doubts that in countries like Lebanon the diversion in perspectives between left and right could ever become the highest priorities; at least not in the shadow of 18 different confessions, Palestinian refugees, 50 billion USD in debt, and neighbors ever so eager for devastating wars.

[Souss]

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

I believe you are right on this one. This is more of a classification on where GMA himself falls on the spectrum, however even though at the moment the party is a reflection of GMA’s position and opinions, there are some declared objectives that can provide a sort of a political compass.

True but IMO they are way too vague to give enough direction. I mean, in 2005 the program was like 20 bullet points.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

What troubles me however is the perception of FPMers themselves, they seem to be concentrated in two blocks, center right and center left, which means that at the moment they are bound by something closer to a cause that falls under political reform, change, and the need to turn the page on the rule of the warlords and their bloody history; a perspective that opens the door much wider to all kinds of possibilities in the future, including some sort of a schism between the center right and the center left, something which surfaces from time to time in the midst of FPMers and on the forum itself, giving rise to conflicting ideological views that are then brushed aside for higher priority matters that are common to both sides.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

Ironically, this means that FPM’s success in achieving the reforms it is seeking could also spell the beginning of its end, because it will remove the common cause binding its center right and center left wings and leaves the door wide open for a split in a normal happy state.

In line with what I said in my previous post, the more troubling schism is the one that is gonna happen due to the lack of a democratic process in the party, that is after after Michel Aoun goes. The centre-left vs centre-right theoretical schism (which could've been healthy) is gonna be dwarfed by that one.

Originally Posted by Dark Angel

that said, I have serious doubts that in countries like Lebanon the diversion in perspectives between left and right could ever become the highest priorities; at least not in the shadow of 18 different confessions, Palestinian refugees, 50 billion USD in debt, and neighbors ever so eager for devastating wars.

I disagree on this. Fundamentally, people (whatever their sect) want the same thing (security, jobs, healthcare, education, etc.) and they are not going to deny themselves access to this just because their are people from other religions in the country. Of course, you need someone to provide this AND be able to communicate with everyone effectively, that's if you want to build a country that is viable for the long term.